(1) Field of the Invention
The invention relates to a condom wrapping
(2) Description of Related Art
For various reasons of hygiene and safety, condoms are wrapped individually. The wrappings typically consist of two superposed leaves of flexible film welded at the edges forming a hermetic seal. The rolled-up condom is contained therein with the vessel adjacent to the internal surface of one of the film leaves. This sort of wrapping normally includes a notch in the edge, permitting the user to commence the tear to open the wrapping and extract the condom. Most of these wrappings do not allow the identification of the orientation of the condom at the moment of its extraction from the wrapping. In fact, these wrappings are symmetrical, the outside surfaces of the film leaves are identical and so the orientation of the condom cannot be ascertained before opening.
In fact condoms do have an orientation as they are packed rolled up from the lower edge towards the vessel. Even though a condom is reversible and theoretically can be used either way around, it is imperative to place the condom on the tip of the penis in the right orientation to permit its unrolling to the base in the opposite direction to that in which it was rolled up. In its rolled-up form the condom is annular or in the shape of a ring corresponding to the rolled up cylindrical part, with the vessel in the centre of this ring shape. Owing to the extreme flexibility of the condom, the vessel can easily be inverted when the condom is handled, meaning that it can be oriented either way relative to the general lay of the annular part. It is therefore quite difficult to identify the correct orientation of the condom once it is held by the annular part, in particular in the dark. An attempt to place the condom the wrong way up will render it unusable or engender a risk of contamination owing to the fact that it must be reversed and repositioned after being in contact with the penis. Various solutions to this problem have been developed.
The document for patent WO 98/46495 allows for a central line of weakness on each of the two leaves of the wrapping and two small loops placed parallel with the lines of weakness on the exterior edges of one of the leaves. Therefore the user can, in theory with a single hand, open the wrapping by holding the pack in one hand at the level of the line of weakness and then by an extension of the thumb engaged with one of the loops create the force to separate the two parts divided by the central line of weakness. As the loops are on one surface only the opening can theoretically always be on the same side of the condom, which may guide the user. However this solution presents two major drawbacks, namely that the hand movement is quite complex, requiring a certain dexterity, and the fact that the condom is grasped by the annular part, allowing the loss of the orientation of the condom once it is extracted from the part of the wrapping which remains in the hand.
The document for patent DE 200 14 263 U1 addresses the problem identified above and proposes as a solution a wrapping fitted with a cartridge of compressed air directed towards the interior of the vessel in such a way that it presents itself clearly on opening the wrapping. Although it is interesting, this wrapping is complex and costly to make.
The document for patent EP 0 604 675 A1 also addresses the problem mentioned above and proposes as a solution a wrapping containing a series of small ribbons distributed on the exterior edge of the annular part of the condom in its rolled-up state, these ribbons having been rolled up with the condom and attached to the wrapping. The placing of the condom is achieved by approaching the tip of the penis with the wrapping and exerting a force on the lower face of the packaging by means of a movement of the wrapping. The lines of weakness on each face of the wrapping part, forming an aperture for the penis and the condom unrolls automatically by continued movement of the wrapping and the ribbons which assist the unrolling of the annular part. Although seeming efficient this solution is costly and complex and has a major drawback in terms of comfort and hygiene.